[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] [8.0.0 Release] One week to the branch

[Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev]

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 3:51 AM Martin Storsjö <martin at martin.st> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2019, Hans Wennborg wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 12:49 AM Jordan Rupprecht <rupprecht at google.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:26 AM Martin Storsjö <martin at martin.st> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> The COFF support in llvm-objcopy is in a pretty half-finished state at the
> >>> moment. I had hoped to have it mostly usable for the common scenarios by
> >>> the time of the branch (the initial patch was sent at the end of
> >>> November), but it's still lacking stripping of sections (while stripping
> >>> of symbols is pretty much done) and a few other minor features I have
> >>> waiting to be polished up according to review comments.
> >>>
> >>> When used right now, it won't error out or warn about not doing what
> >>> actually was requested, but just copy the object/executable and do some
> >>> symbol removals if requested.
> >>>
> >>> With the branch coming real soon, what's the preferred course of action?
> >>>
> >>> 0 - Do nothing, release this as is. As llvm-objcopy hasn't supported COFF
> >>> before, nobody will try it and run into the issue.
> >>
> >> Option 0 seems fine to me
> >
> > I think this is fine too. If you want you could add a note somewhere
> > that the COFF support is experimental and incomplete.
>
> FWIW, I've got the main COFF functionality that I had planned on doing
> committed in trunk by now. So at least for my own usecases, it's fully
> functional by now. (And for unsupported options, it clearly errors out.)
>
> If there's an interest in this, it should be easy to backport to the
> release branch (with no regression risk, as I believe none of the patches
> since the branch touch anything outside of the COFF directory), but I
> don't have a direct need myself to have it in the release.

Since it's low-risk and finishing up functionality, if it's just a
small amount of patches we might as well merge it over. Do you have a
list of what commits are involved?